Originally Posted by mkoesel
But wait a minute here. This is complete bunk.
We have standards in place to govern the emissions of vehicles. These standards consider only the emissions the vehicle itself produces (strictly speaking, they actually use fuel economy since it is proportionate to emissions), not the emissions produced by the refueling infrastructure. Just like we don't take the emissions of the oil refinery that produces the gasonline nor the emissions of the transportation system that delivers it to the fueling stations into account when determining whether a car meets LEV, ULEV, SULEV, etc. standards, we should similarly not do so when determining whether a particular vehicle is considered a ZEV.
Double standard? Yes, absolutley unquestionably. Justifiable? Only if you are a hypocrite with an agenda.
I don't understand your point here? There's a massive difference between saying light emissions, etc, and saying ZERO.
The problem here in the UK is the ZERO emissions. They're not saying the lowest emissions of any car, they're stating zero.
It's not an agenda, and it's not bunk... what they're saying is completely justifiable.
SULEV, etc are all relative. *zero* is not relative.